Skip to content

Dhimmi Ron Paul: An Evil Appeaser of Evil

August 25, 2010
Ron Paul's "Revolution" is destroyed by the virus of political correctness.

Ron Paul's "Revolution" is destroyed by the virus of political correctness.

Some men of power in the past century thought they could mollify evil through a policy of appeasement. They believed that by appeasing those who were determined to pursue their evil goal, they would achieve global peace. But history has it that Neville Chamberlain, a British statesman and prime minister who pursued a policy of appeasement toward Nazi Germany, was morally guilty for the loss of millions of lives and the destruction of many countries in the world.

The following statement embodied Chamberlain’s rhetoric of appeasement that helped bolster the guts and grit of Germany’s absolute fuhrer Adolf Hitler to pursue his plan to dominate the world:

We should seek by all means in our power to avoid war, by analysing possible causes, by trying to remove them, by discussion in a spirit of collaboration and good will. I cannot believe that such a programme would be rejected by the people of this country, even if it does mean the establishment of personal contact with the dictators.

But how could Chamberlain avoid war through his pipe dream of appeasement? There were a lot of indications and signs prior to the eruption of World War II that Hitler was not interested in peace. All he wanted was war and a world under the claws of his evil ideology of Nazism. Hitler and his Nazi intelligentsia worked so hard to elevate Nazism to an occult religion that corrupted the minds of the Germans. The Nazis understood the power of religion and faith in destroying man’s freewill and consciousness. Hitler’s top propagandist Joseph Geobbels clearly understood the power of propaganda in destroying people’s perception of reality. Nazism was an occult religion, and it died with the death of Hitler and the invasion and occupation of Germany by the Allied forces.

However, more than fifty years after the death of Nazism, the world now confronts the revival of Islam. The resurgence of militant Islam appears to be more dangerous and more deceptive than Hitler’s Nazi ideology. The religious war of today’s militant Islam is no longer waged by an identified power like the defunct Ottoman empire that died in 1922, but by stateless, borderless terrorist organizations like al-Qa’ida, Abu Nidal Organization, Abu Sayyaf Group, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, Hamas, etc. that stealthily operate in many countries in the world.

There’s a need to understand that Islam is not just a religion; Islam is a political ideology and a way of life that aims to dominate the world and impose sharia law and Islamic tradition and principles. For more than 500 years, the Ottoman empire ruled most of the world under the banner of one religion, which is Islam. History tells us that this Islamic empire built Islamic houses of worship or mosques on every important territory they conquered as a sign of victory and dominance. And this Islamic tradition of “dominance” is still very much alive today.

The proposal to build a US$100 million mosque near Ground Zero nine years after the destruction of the World Trade Center, which is a symbol of America’s greatness and capitalism, by 19 moslem hijackers clearly suggests Islamic triumphalism. Defenders of the 13-storey mosque argue that Christians, moslems, Bhudists, etc. have the right to build their respective houses of worship in America. Political figures like New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, President Barack Obama, and Libertarian Congressman Ron Paul invoke the property rights of the mosque’s founder, imam Feisal Rauf. They preach the virtue of tolerance and multiculturalism. I don’t have any problem with religion. I don’t care if people would like to worship a stone so long as they don’t throw it at me. The proposed mosque near Ground Zero suggests Islamic triumphalism. The mosque’s proposed name “Cordoba House” bears historical significance for the Islamists.

“Cordoba” was the name given to a mosque in Spain when it was invaded by moslems in the 8th century AD. The medieval conquest of Spain- “al-Andalus- is regarded by many Islamic scholars as a predestined step in the destiny of the Islamic religion. The mosque of Cordoba was erected on the foundation of a Christian cathedral, but when the place was conquered by the Europeans they converted the Islamic house of worship into a cathedral.

So in Islamic terms, “Cordoba” does not really mean “cooperation” or mutual understanding” as its founders would like to sell to the American people. It means Islamic rule in the West. The term does not mean coexistence, unless coexistence is construed as referring to Islamic dominance. The founders of the Cordoba House are trying their best to sell the idea of multiculturalism and coexistence to the American public. Unfortunately, the America’s ruling elite like President Barack Obama, Bloomberg, Ron Paul, among others bought this Islamic lie and deception. What these ruling elites and the media elites don’t know is that Islam embraces “Taqiyya”, or the Islamic principle of lying for the sake of Allah. Under this principle of “Taqiyya”, every moslem is encouraged to lie and deceive others for the sake of their God.

An Iraqi-American columnist named Khudhayr Taher published an article in the Arab online liberal daily in which he warns against the desire to turn the U.S. into a Muslim country. Taher knows that the mosque is all about the revival of Islamic imperialism and dominance in the modern era. Taher wrote:

“In these days, the issue of the Muslim decision to build a mosque near the place where the crime of the cowardly September 11 terrorist attacks took place has come up. We must note that a hostile and provocative name [Cordoba] has been chosen for this mosque. It is well known that the first Cordoba Mosque was built by Muslims in a city in Spain, after they occupied this Christian country, killing its men and capturing its women to bring them to Arab countries as slaves and servants to serve their sexual pleasure. The Arabs and Muslims have never ceased to take pride and bask in the glory of this imperialist history, which they consider to be a symbol of their strength and power, and they are unashamed of the fact that the annals [of their history] are full of shameful crimes.

“Today, it seems as though some Muslims in America are enamored of the dream of bringing back this ugly imperialist Muslim history, which is based on occupying peaceful peoples, on trying to force them to change their religious beliefs by the sword, on killing the men, and on abducting the women from their homes and bringing them to their own countries. Choosing the name ‘Cordoba House’ for the mosque to be constructed in New York was not coincidental or random and innocent. It bears within it significance and dreams of expansion and invasion [into the territory] of the other, [while] striving to change his religion and to subjugate him…

“New York has many mosques, for Sunnis and for Shiites. Of course there is a significant infiltration of extremist terrorist ideology among some of the Sunnis, and likewise there is a significant infiltration of the Iranian intelligence [apparatus] among some of the Shi’ites. This infiltration, both among the Sunnis and among the Shi’ites, has spread across the U.S. New York State has many mosques, and doesn’t need any more of them – not to mention that for work reasons Muslims do not attend mosque every day, but only on Saturdays and Sundays. Therefore, the Muslims have no real need for the construction of this mosque, which constitutes a provocation against the sensibilities of the Americans and a reminder for them of the Muslim imperialism in Spain and of the acts it committed against the Christians – such as murder, pillage, taking captives, and aggression against women.

“As a Muslim and as an American citizen, I hope that the U.S. government will issue a decision to confiscate the funds designated for the construction of this mosque, and to transfer them to a budget for rebuilding the towers of the World Trade Center in New York, [and also to] ban the building of [additional] mosques in the U.S., because there is no real need for them. Also, [we must] take into account the danger that they [i.e. the mosques] pose because they are hothouses for extremist terrorist ideology and for hatred of the other, and because they carry out open missionary activities considered a violation of the freedom and religion of others.”

Ron Paul’s defense of the so-called Islamic center near Ground Zero is not really surprising considering the fact that he subtly blamed America for the death of 3,000 9/11 victims.

Ron Paul said during the 2008 Presidential debate:

“They attack us because we’ve been over there– we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We’ve been in the Middle East – I think Reagan was right. We don’t understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we’re building an embassy in Iraq that’s bigger than the Vatican. We’re building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us.”

Here’s also what Paul said:

If it became known that 9/11 resulted in part from a desire to retaliate against what many Muslims saw as American aggression and occupation, the need to demonize Islam would be difficult if not impossible.

There is no doubt that a small portion of radical, angry Islamists do want to kill us but the question remains, what exactly motivates this hatred?

If Islam is further discredited by making the building of the mosque the issue, then the false justification for our wars in the Middle East will continue to be acceptable.

Now here’s Mr. Paul’s latest nihilist position on the Ground Zero mosque:

The debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque.

Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be “sensitive” requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from “ground zero.”

Just think of what might (not) have happened if the whole issue had been ignored and the national debate stuck with war, peace, and prosperity. There certainly would have been a lot less emotionalism on both sides. The fact that so much attention has been given the mosque debate, raises the question of just why and driven by whom?

In my opinion it has come from the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia and are compelled to constantly justify it.

This Libertarian politician is merely echoing the anti-American propaganda of the leftists and liberals to topple America and destroy its founding spirit. America is not building an empire. It never occupied a foreign territory. Sure, it invaded my country, Philippines, but it left. Imperialism negates America’s founding spirit— that man is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. In fact most Filipinos should be very grateful for America for saving the Philippines from Japanese occupation. America waged a wrong war against Vietnam and then left the country. Again, it missed the wrong target after the September 11 attack when it invaded Iraq, but America then pulled out its troops and gave what the liberals call “democracy” to the savages there.

Ron Paul firmly believes that the terrorists are motivated by the so-called historical crimes of America. This proves that he also shares the sick mind of Noam Chomsky, who has been spreading Anti-American propaganda and helping the cause of America’s ideological enemies. Yes, both Ron Paul and Noam Chomsky are America’s most useful idiots!

It seems that Ron Paul is not really listening to the “hate speeches” and anti-American slogans of the terrorists and their sympathizers on American soil. They said they “love death and the Americans love life!” They said they wanted Islam to dominate the world and impose sharia law. In Iran people shout “Death to America” every Friday as part of their Orwellian “two-minute hate”. They said they all wanted to kill all “infidels and destroy Western Civilization” because that’s what their prophet commanded them to do.

Indeed, if Mr. Paul were very much familiar with the history of and the principles held by America’s great founding fathers, he must do a Thomas Jefferson. Ron Paul must cure his Islamic idiocy and clarify his perception of reality by getting a copy of the Koran. This is exactly what Thomas Jefferson did.

In regard to Jefferson’s encounter with the Koran, here’s an excerpt of Christopher Hitchen’s “Jefferson’s Quran“:

A few years later, in 1786, the new United States found that it was having to deal very directly with the tenets of the Muslim religion. The Barbary states of North Africa (or, if you prefer, the North African provinces of the Ottoman Empire, plus Morocco) were using the ports of today’s Algeria, Libya, and Tunisia to wage a war of piracy and enslavement against all shipping that passed through the Strait of Gibraltar. Thousands of vessels were taken, and more than a million Europeans and Americans sold into slavery. The fledgling United States of America was in an especially difficult position, having forfeited the protection of the British Royal Navy. Under this pressure, Congress gave assent to the Treaty of Tripoli, negotiated by Jefferson’s friend Joel Barlow, which stated roundly that “the government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion, as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen.” This has often been taken as a secular affirmation, which it probably was, but the difficulty for secularists is that it also attempted to buy off the Muslim pirates by the payment of tribute. That this might not be so easy was discovered by Jefferson and John Adams when they went to call on Tripoli’s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. They asked him by what right he extorted money and took slaves in this way. As Jefferson later reported to Secretary of State John Jay, and to the Congress:

“The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Mr. Paul and a lot of appeasing Libertarians really need to get a copy of the Koran before completely delivering America to its enemies. Islam is a political ideology that aims to dominate the world. The Libertarians love to talk about liberty and freedom yet they spit on these ideals by embracing anarchism. They love to talk about property rights and religious freedom yet they unwittingly support the destruction of the very freedom they preach and the annihilation of America and of the Western Civilization.

Ron Paul and the Libertarians ignore the parallelism between Hitler’s Nazism and imam Feisal Rauf’s militant Islam. Before World War II, Neville Chamberlain and the intellectual elites in Great Britain and the United States ignored Hitler’s violation of the Treaty of Versailles, minor transgressions, annexation of territories, and blatant acts of war. Instead of dealing with Hitler accordingly these intellectual elites preached the virtue of tolerance, compromise and understanding. They thought that their policy of appeasement would foster global peace, but it was too late when they realized that Hitler didn’t want appeasement but a global power under Germany’s Nazism.

I see ominous parallels here. Today’s Liberals and Libertarians adopt Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement by preaching the same anti-values of tolerance, understanding and compromise. These moral cowards like Ron Paul, Barack Obama, Bloomberg, and Noam Chomsky are more dangerous than the terrorists who openly expressed their intention to destroy America and the Western World.

Ron Paul indeed found a new friend in this imam Feisal Rauf who states:

We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al Qaida has on its hands of innocent non Muslims. You may remember that the US-led sanctions against Iraq led to the death of over half a million Iraqi children. This has been documented by the United Nations. And when Madeleine Albright, who has become a friend of mine over the last couple of years, when she was Secretary of State and was asked whether this was worth it, said it was worth it.

America can only be destroyed from within with the help of “intelligent” people like Ron Paul. There’s a disease that is gradually killing America today, and this disease is called political correctness.

Here’s a must-see video:

Why stupid liberals and libertarians fall for evil?

The liberal and libertarian dhimma would love to see this video!

Why Do they hate America?

15 Comments leave one →
  1. Krenshaw Heal permalink
    September 9, 2010 3:38

    So in your informed mind, Ron Paul makes a nihilistic comment?

    How delusional does one have to be to think promoting peace vs. warmongering imperialist nutbags = nihilistic? Ask, which one of the two will lead to destruction of mankind? The man who wants No entangled alliances, free markets, open trade and diplomacy, and friendship. Or those apologists who stupidly make the case that while they get uppity on feeling good about themselves while they condemn different religious and ideological practices of others, the same very act will condemn their own practices, come next time under a different prevailing political winds of change?

    Your statements clearly illustrates what an apologist for the RulingClass of pussy warmongers and race pimp bitches who never ever want to do the dirty work themselves, but use other human beings like toy soldiers, and fund hapless and desperate scribes and grant whores to do offer up douchebaggery in public propaganda for all the sheeple’s regular enjoyment.

    As you seem to be so hell bent on teaching “them” a lesson, why don’t you just join one of the numerous mercenary firms? Might as well get paid to murder innocent civilians that you deem deserving of death, no? This way, you can be happy living with the consequences of your own actions.

    Otherwise you’re just bitching and whining. Really, when’s the last time OpEd scribes and policy wonks really made a lasting change or difference in the world, other than supplementing neoCON douchebags with appropriate legalese to be offered up as a mark of their delusional rationale for imperialist policies?

    Really, just who is more naive?

    To think our foreign policy has no bearing? Or the common sense? You’d think it’d be obvious to you that when you screw your wife’s neighbor, the said neighbor might want to have just more than a word or two with you?

    One would have to be an imbecile to think understanding the cause and motive of a murderer equates to condoning it. What are you five?

    This is PRECISELY the core flaw in your liberal interventionist, ‘I’m better than you’ delusion. Besides, even IF, for the sake of discussion moron neocons were right about the last ten yrs. Really, aside from making you feel better that “islamo-fascists” are getting bombed daily, anything really even change toward your own objective goals?

    Seriously? WTF is more naive? You, and people like you, or Ron Paul?

    Apparently as you splash Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged all over your blog, you missed the core point of the book: the Individual is the ultimate minority. And ALL Gvt subjugate and murder.

    But, having said that. I’ll extend sans-intellect credit where it is due: Ayn was as delusional in her latter days, as her raging senility set in, she thought nothing of murdering Arabs, as she view them backwards and barbaric, thus their occupation and subjugation were justified. Ironic, in complete contradiction to much of her work, she would endorse a Statist act of utterly blatant imperialism.

    You Sir, are a delusional apologist wrapped in a still nuisance of your own thought contraption; I suppose someone forgot to tell you the Europeans have long left your lands, well, in blatant colonialistic terms, anyways.

    I mean, come on. Didn’t you get the memo? YOU AREN’T a Colonial subject anymore. No one is impressed with this level of self-pity, and subconscious inferiority complex.

    It’s okay not to kiss ass to your conquistadors. But, suppose, if you admire Ayn Rand, you’re in good company. I’d just be careful not to open your yap once you sense your own onslaught of senility set in and make asinine statements. Public verbal humiliations don’t go away, in the age of the internetS.

    Just don’t add to the insult by proclaiming yourself to be a libertarian. If so, you don’t know the meaning.

    Thanks for providing me with my daily fix of neoCON/neoLiB amusement quota. You didn’t disappoint.

    • September 9, 2010 3:38

      Neo-con/Neo-Lib? LMAO! You’re clearly out of your mind like your idol Ron Paul. Is it not that you, Libertarians, are in bed with the liberals and the leftists on this issue? Wake up to reality, kid!

      • Ernesto Romualdez permalink
        September 19, 2010 3:38

        Too generalized reply for a very sound argument . It’s lot like a sexual mumbles of 13-year old. Too broad to be understood at all.

    • Ernesto Romualdez permalink
      September 19, 2010 3:38

      I agree a lot with you about Ron Paul.

  2. Ernesto Romualdez permalink
    September 19, 2010 3:38

    I wanted to kill Ron Paul!

    No. I never really aspired for it. For if he is indeed an evil appeaser, it came to my mind he must be a lot lesser evil than those Neocons you admire.

    I admire your thinking about the gentleman from Texas. Yes, I admire your stupidity on the advocacies he has. You maybe quoted him right but nevertheless you misunderstood him a lot.

    Ron Paul never appeases who’s who. He lives by strict principle. He is imparting a wisdom we must understand as free individuals.

    How can someone who has far less wisdom have the utter arrogance not to understand, in the most basic humility, that Ron Paul, a statesman, is strict Constitutionalist, anti-Big Government, anti-Overspending, pro-Sound Monetray policy, is strongly rallying behind the doctrine of Liberty and Peace? What you are doing is staging a bulgar precedence that your next generation of children would be slaves to the same thinking as yours.

    • February 27, 2011 3:38

      Ernesto Romualdez,

      This is my first time to see this comment.

      It is true that Ron Paul brandishes himself as a defender of capitalism, but the fact remains that his politically correct foreign policy is very dangerous to America, freedom and capitalism itself. Ron Paul thinks and behave like the way leftists do. I have explained why Mr. Paul is an appeaser of evil. However, I like his son better. The son makes real sense when it comes to foreign policy and security. He’s got both the economics and politics.

      This shows you don’t know what you’re talking about:

      “How can someone who has far less wisdom have the utter arrogance not to understand, in the most basic humility, that Ron Paul, a statesman, is strict Constitutionalist, anti-Big Government, anti-Overspending, pro-Sound Monetray policy, is strongly rallying behind the doctrine of Liberty and Peace?”

      If you’re an honest and intelligent commenter, you would have discovered that I’m not attacking Ron Paul’s economics and all the stupid things you mentioned. Don’t just read the TITLE. Read and understand the entire blog so that you may be able to make logical, responsive comment.

      He may be right when it comes to the aspects you mentioned, but you need to understand that foreign policy and economics are two different matters although they’re not opposites. You talk like most of my stupid leftist critics. Ron Paul is no Thomas Jefferson or George Washington. Both these founders had great understanding of how politics and economics work. That’s why Jefferson had to buy a Koran just to understand the nature of the Islamic savages who kidnapped, enslaved and sold Americans and Europeans during his time. Those STUPID things you mentioned (e.g., anti-Big Government, anti-Overspending, pro-Sound Monetray policy) are simply part and parcel of economics, and we all know that Ron Paul holds no MONOPOLY over sound economics. What I’m talking about is security policy and foreign policy. What I’m talking about is the aspect that can save those stupid things you mentioned.

      By the way, I don’t admire the neocons. I despise them as much as I despise Libertarians.

  3. November 25, 2012 3:38

    Have you ever considered about including a little bit more than just your
    articles? I mean, what you say is valuable and all.
    Nevertheless just imagine if you added some great pictures or videos to give
    your posts more, “pop”! Your content is excellent but with images and videos, this site could certainly be one
    of the greatest in its niche. Excellent blog!


  1. Dhimmi Ron Paul: An Evil Appeaser of Evil | Γονείς σε Δράση
  2. Dhimmi Ron Paul: An Evil Appeaser of Evil « THE VINCENTON POST | algertoday
  3. IRANIUM: A Must-See Docufilm « THE VINCENTON POST
  4. Yaron Brook on Ron Paul’s Fundamental Contradictions and Compromises « THE VINCENTON POST
  5. RH Bill: A Marxist, Politically Correct Policy « THE VINCENTON POST
  6. RH Bill: A Marxist, Politically Correct Policy Vs. Free Speech, Freedom « THE VINCENTON POST
  7. On Israel’s Alleged Land Grabbing and Zionism: Turning the Tables on Dishonest Libertarians « THE VINCENTON POST
  8. Liberty Vs Theocratic Totalitarianism: 4 Stages of Islamic Conquest: « THE VINCENTON POST

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: